A cohort study on full breastfeeding and child neuropsychological development: the role of maternal social, psychological, and nutritional factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: This study investigated whether duration of full breastfeeding is associated with child neuropsychological development and whether this association is explained by social, psychological, and nutritional factors within families. METHOD: Participants in this study were a population-based birth cohort in the city of Sabadell (Catalonia, Spain). Females were recruited during the first trimester of pregnancy between July 2004 and July 2006. Information about parental characteristics and breastfeeding was obtained through questionnaires. Full breastfeeding was categorized as never, short term (≤4mo), long term (4-6mo), or very long term (>6mo). A trained psychologist assessed the neuropsychological development of children at 4 years of age (n=434) using the McCarthy Scales of Children's Abilities (MSCA). RESULTS: Full breastfeeding showed an independent association with child general MSCA scores after adjusting for a range of social, psychological, and nutritional factors (>6mo, coefficient=7.4 [95% confidence interval=2.8-12.0], p=0.011). Maternal social class, education level, and IQ were also associated with child neuropsychological scores, but did not explain breastfeeding associations. Omega-3 (n3) fatty acid levels were not associated with child neuropsychological scores. INTERPRETATION: Very long-term full breastfeeding was independently associated with neuropsychological functions of children at 4 years of age. Maternal indicators of intelligence, psychopathology, and colostrum n3 fatty acids did not explain this association.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".